Remove Copyright Infringement Remove Derivative Work Remove Fair Use Remove Magazine
article thumbnail

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

Indiana Intellectual Property Law

Supreme Court has ruled that Andy Warhol’s orange silkscreen portrait of musician Prince, adapted from a photograph by Lynn Goldsmith, does not qualify as “fair use” under copyright law. The commercial nature of the copying further weighed against fair use. Continue reading

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Finds Warhol’s Commercial Licensing of “Orange Prince” to Vanity Fair Is Not Fair Use and Infringes Goldsmith’s Famed Rock Photo

Intellectual Property Law Blog

s (AWF), [1] in a long-awaited decision impacting fair use under Section 107(1) of the Copyright Act. Goldsmith and, as a result, did not constitute fair use. [2] Goldsmith and, as a result, did not constitute fair use. [2] Goldsmith was not paid or credited for this use.

Fair Use 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

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. By Guest Blogger Tyler Ochoa By a 7-2 vote, the U.S. Goldsmith , No.

article thumbnail

Court to Revisit Fair Use in Tattoo Infringement Case

Copyright Lately

Goldsmith on a first-of-its-kind copyright infringement lawsuit involving celebrity tattoo artist Katherine Von Drachenberg (aka Kat Von D). Fischer denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment, finding triable issues of substantial similarity and fair use. Fifteen minutes of fame, meet permanent ink.

article thumbnail

Use of Warhol’s Prince Image Found Not to Be Sufficiently Transformative for Fair Use 

LexBlog IP

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. copyright law. Applying a new lens on how to view the purpose of a derivative work under U.S. Copyright law in the U.S.

article thumbnail

Prince Pop Art Not a Fair Use: SCOTUS Rules Against Warhol

LexBlog IP

The Supreme Court ruled on May 18 that Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” work of pop art was not a fair use when licensed to Condé Nast in 2016. Although this landmark copyright decision is hot off the presses, the facts date back to 1981 when the underlying photograph was first shot. § 107 ).

article thumbnail

WIPIP session 2: ™ Doctrine, © Fair Use

43(B)log

Goldsmith SCOTUS understood the “use” to be the foundation’s commercial licensing. But licensing is neither a © use nor an act of infringement. Incoherent to raise/evaluate fair use as to an act that wasn’t a use or infringement. Sotomayor says, 8 times, that the use at issue is commercial licensing.