article thumbnail

No Fair Use for Warhol Prince Photo

LexBlog IP

Warhol’s use of Prince’s photo (taken by Lynn Goldsmith) was not entitled to fair use. The Court found that Goldsmith’s earlier photo and Andy Warhol’s use served the same commercial purpose – as a magazine illustration. I am not so sure. Take a look a the illustration above.

article thumbnail

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

LexBlog IP

1] That decision shook the art world, as it seems to dramatically narrow the scope of the fair use doctrine, and raises doubts about the lawfulness of many existing works. [2] It found that all four fair use factors weighed against fair use. [12] Controversyā€¯ [8] : The Litigation.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

"Arenā€™t we still, basically, in the dark?" (UPDATED 3X)

The Art Law Blog

On this reading, there's still no way to have any confidence about how any given fair use case will be decided." That would have been a big deal in fair use jurisprudence. There's no support in the Second Circuit opinion for that second reading, so we're back to the first: these Judges saw this particular use differently.

article thumbnail

Warhol and Prince: Good Artists Borrow, Great Artistsā€¦Litigate

LexBlog IP

adopting that posture of indifference, the majority does something novel (though in law, unlike in art, it is rarely a good thing to be transformative).” The decision has been both decried as an assault on the future of art and hailed as a major vindication for photographers. ’” Take that.