Remove 2016 Remove Artwork Remove Copyright Infringement Remove Fair Use
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

Infographic | Copyright legal dispute

Olartemoure Blog

In 1984, Vanity Fair licensed one of her black-and-white studio portraits for $400 and commissioned Warhol to create a piece for a feature of Prince. He used a cropped photo based on one of Goldsmith’s images to create his artwork. The photographer threatened to sue the Foundation alleging copyright infringement.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Appropriation Art vs. Copyright Law: A Recent Setback for the Promotion of the Arts

JIPEL Copyright Blog

While a popular and respected form of art , appropriation art’s essence – the purposeful use of preexisting works – makes it especially susceptible to claims of copyright infringement. Outside of consent from the original work’s author, the best legal defense for appropriation art is the doctrine of fair use.

Art 52
article thumbnail

No Free Use in the Purple Rain – U.S. Supreme Court Finds License of Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” Infringes Photographer’s Copyright

LexBlog IP

However, Andy Warhol would go on to create 15 additional works using the Goldsmith photograph, now known as the artist’s “Prince Series.” 1] The Southern District of New York granted summary judgment to AWF on its claim of fair use, but the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed.

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] In 2016, Vanity Fair licensed Orange Prince from AWF for the cover of their commemorative issue about Prince.

Fair Use 130
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

LexBlog IP

’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] In 2016, Vanity Fair licensed Orange Prince from AWF for the cover of their commemorative issue about Prince.

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

LexBlog IP

’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] In 2016, Vanity Fair licensed Orange Prince from AWF for the cover of their commemorative issue about Prince.