Remove Art Law Remove Copyright Infringement Remove Licensing Remove Marketing
article thumbnail

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

LexBlog IP

A few years later, in 1984, Goldsmith’s agency, which had retained the rights to those images, licensed one of them to Vanity Fair for use in an article called “Purple Fame.” Goldsmith counterclaimed for copyright infringement. Vanity Fair , in turn, commissioned Warhol to make a silkscreen using Goldsmith’s photograph.

article thumbnail

Andy Warhol, Prince, and the First Amendment: U.S. Supreme Court Grants Review of Questions Concerning “Fair Use” Under Copyright Act

LexBlog IP

Vanity Fair licensed one of Goldsmith’s Prince photographs to use in a Vanity Fair article. When Goldsmith became aware of the Vanity Fair cover image, she informed the Foundation’s director of licensing that she believed the cover infringed her copyright. Goldsmith counterclaimed for copyright infringement.

article thumbnail

Stop, thief! How to win big in a copyright infringement case

Art Law Journal

Actual damages represent the money that would have been received if the artist had sold or licensed it to the infringer. To illustrate this concept, let’s continue with the infringement scenario discussed earlier. Your fee for licensing work to a blog is $400, so the actual damage is the loss of that licensing fee.