Artwork Derivative Work Licensing Publishing 
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
On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court found that artistic changes to a pre-existing work, alone, not necessarily sufficient to make a derivative work fair use. Applying a new lens on how to view the purpose of a derivative work under U.S. copyright law.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
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.
Copyright Lately
AUGUST 25, 2023
Howell ruled last Friday that the Register of Copyrights did not act “arbitrarily or capriciously” in denying a copyright registration to Dr. Stephen Thaler for artwork generated entirely by artificial intelligence. What is Unclaimable Material? Previously registered material. Material that is in the public domain.
Patently-O
OCTOBER 11, 2022
Warhol’s Estate argues that the artworks represent a commentary on the dehumanizing nature of celebrity whereas the Goldsmith photos merely reflect Prince in his unique human form. The published article acknowledges Goldsmith. Warhol was never personally a party to the license).
Kluwer Copyright Blog
AUGUST 7, 2023
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.
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