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] Controversy” [8] : The Litigation.

article thumbnail

[Guest Post] Long walk to copyright reform #9: The Copyright Amendment Bill ensures fair remuneration for South African creators and performers

The IPKat

Despite this, conversations in the media and some academic circles around the CAB have largely focused on its provisions relating to L&Es, especially fair use (for instance, see here , here and here ). Indeed, the CAB lives up to its core objectives as set out in its long title.

Copyright 132
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Copyright and Transformative Fair Use

Patently-O

On October 12, 2022, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the fair use copyright case of Andy Warhol Foundation, Inc. Andy Warhol admittedly used Lynn Goldmith’s copyrighted photographs of Prince as the basis for his set of sixteen silkscreens. by Dennis Crouch. Goldsmith , Docket No. 21-869 (2022). 569 (1994).

Fair Use 134
article thumbnail

The Supreme Court Case of Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith: What, if Anything, Does it Mean to Artificial Intelligence?

Velocity of Content

“If an original work and a secondary use share the same or highly similar purposes, and the secondary use is of a commercial nature, the first factor is likely to weigh against fair use, absent some other justification for copying.” Fair use is always extremely fact dependent.

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. This has important implications for the doctrine of fair use.

article thumbnail

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

LexBlog IP

Warhol and his Foundation’s claim of fair use lost. 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. ” The license provided that the use would be for “one time” only.

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 1984, Condé Nast, the publisher, obtained a license from Goldsmith to allow Andy Warhol to use her Prince portrait as the foundation for a single serigraphy to be featured in Vanity Fair magazine. In 2016, Condé Nast acquired a license from the Warhol Foundation to use the Prince Series as illustrations for a new magazine.