article thumbnail

Supreme Court Rules adaption of Warhol print not “fair use”

Indiana Intellectual Property Law

In a 7-2 majority opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the court found that both Warhol’s artwork and Goldsmith’s original photograph served the same purpose of depicting Prince in magazine stories about him. The commercial nature of the copying further weighed against fair use.

article thumbnail

SCOTUS Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Portraits Are Not Fair Use

The IP Law Blog

The decision affirms a previous ruling by the Second Circuit, which found that Warhol’s artwork shared the same commercial purpose as the original photograph taken by photographer Lynn Goldsmith. The Andy Warhol Foundation contended that the artworks were transformative and gave new meaning to Goldsmith’s photo.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

No Fair Use for Warhol Prince Photo

LexBlog IP

The Court found that Goldsmith’s earlier photo and Andy Warhol’s use served the same commercial purpose – as a magazine illustration. And Warhol often cited “mass production” as a justification for his artwork. Goldsmith’s photo can be found here , as well as Warhol’s commercial use.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Holds Warhol’s “Orange Prince” Not Transformative, Not Fair Use

IP Tech Blog

The main principle practitioners can derive from Goldsmith is that transformation alone is not enough render copying of a reference work “fair use.” When Prince passed away in 2016, the Andy Warhol Foundation (“AWF”) licensed “Orange Prince” for use on the cover of a commemorative magazine cover. Goldsmith et al, Case No.

article thumbnail

Let’s Go Hazy: Making Sense of Fair Use After Warhol

Copyright Lately

Meanwhile, by the time the case reached the Court, photographer Lynn Goldsmith had limited her challenge to AWF’s act of licensing Warhol’s work to Condé Nast for use in a magazine commemorating Prince’s death. Put another way, it ain’t what you do, it’s the way that you do it. “[T]he first fair use factor.

article thumbnail

SCOTUS Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Portraits Are Not Fair Use

LexBlog IP

The decision affirms a previous ruling by the Second Circuit, which found that Warhol’s artwork shared the same commercial purpose as the original photograph taken by photographer Lynn Goldsmith. The Andy Warhol Foundation contended that the artworks were transformative and gave new meaning to Goldsmith’s photo.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Holds Warhol’s “Orange Prince” Not Transformative, Not Fair Use

LexBlog IP

The main principle practitioners can derive from Goldsmith is that transformation alone is not enough render copying of a reference work “fair use.” When Prince passed away in 2016, the Andy Warhol Foundation (“AWF”) licensed “Orange Prince” for use on the cover of a commemorative magazine cover.