Artwork Derivative Work Licensing Litigation 
Copyright Lately
SEPTEMBER 12, 2022
One of Deadly Doll’s popular designs is a cartoon image of a bikini-clad pin-up girl holding a skull: Deadly Doll’s original artwork. Deadly Doll has applied versions of its artwork to various products, including tops and sweatpants: Deadly Doll’s artwork as reproduced on useful articles.
LexBlog IP
MAY 19, 2023
Clarifying Copyright Fair Use in Commercialized and Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from Warhol v. Goldsmith by Jaime Chandra Clarifying Fair Use in Commercialized & Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from the Warhol v. We’re talking about Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts, Inc. Table of Contents: Warhol v.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
IP Tech Blog
JUNE 2, 2023
The Supreme Court recently upheld an appellate court’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s use of a photograph of Prince as a reference for a collection of screen prints is not fair use – to the extent his foundation decided to license them at least. Goldsmith et al, Case No. Unbeknownst to Ms. Goldsmith, Andy Warhol not only used Ms.
LexBlog IP
JUNE 2, 2023
The Supreme Court recently upheld an appellate court’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s use of a photograph of Prince as a reference for a collection of screen prints is not fair use – to the extent his foundation decided to license them at least. Goldsmith et al, Case No. ” Unbeknownst to Ms.
Copyright Lately
MAY 22, 2023
In a 7-2 decision , the Court ruled that the commercial licensing of Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” to Condé Nast to illustrate a story about the late musician shared “substantially the same purpose” as the original Lynn Goldsmith photo from which Warhol’s silkscreen was derived, and therefore weighed against fair use. Goldsmith.
Kluwer Copyright Blog
MAY 9, 2023
Does such an output infringe on a copyrighted work of a third party, especially those works “ingested” during the training stage of the AI system? Under US law, is the output a “ derivative work ” of the “ingested” copyrighted works? There is disagreement among commentators whether this is a desirable development.
LexBlog IP
APRIL 13, 2022
On August 6, Roc-A-Fella filed an amended complaint, naming GoDigital, a company to which Dash allegedly granted the right to license Reasonable Doubt to certain websites, as a co-defendant. [13] According to Miramax, the creation of the NFTs constituted copyright infringement because they were unauthorized derivative works of Pulp Fiction.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
97 
Let's personalize your content