Remove 2016 Remove Contracts Remove Derivative Work Remove Fair Use
article thumbnail

The Battle Over Poker NFTs

Plagiarism Today

” The case raises questions of fair use and whether the new paintings were transformative enough to be non-infringing or if they were simply derivative works. Three years later, she licensed one of those photos of Vanity Fair who, with permission, commissioned a new work based on it by Andy Warhol.

Fair Use 239
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.

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

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

WIPIP Concurrent Session #3: Copyright Doctrine

43(B)log

Zahr Said, Shotgun Damages in Copyright Multipliers used to ratchet up damages. Before 2016, appeared to be that these multipliers were impermissible punitive damages. In 2016, Leonard v. Cited over 130 times since then—cottage industry using scarcity, exclusivity, and quality multipliers; tons of default judgments.

article thumbnail

A Preliminary Analysis of Trump’s Copyright Lawsuit Over Interview Recordings (Trump v. Simon & Schuster) (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The lawsuit involves sound recordings of 19 interviews that then-President Trump voluntarily gave to Woodward between December 2019 and August 2020, plus one interview from 2016 (when Trump was still a candidate). The Second Circuit nonetheless held that the published quotations were a fair use. complaint filed Jan.

Copyright 119
article thumbnail

13 Spooky Copyright Cases, Just in Time for Halloween

Copyright Lately

” They argued that had Twain really written the book, Clemens’ estate would own the copyright and Harper would have the exclusive right under contract to publish it. In 2016, author Gerald Brittle alleged that the Warner Bros. New Line successfully moved for a preliminary injunction to block the video’s release.

Copyright 144