Derivative Work Licensing Litigation Marketing 
Velocity of Content
MARCH 16, 2023
Each of these cases is unique, fact dependent, and likely, if fully litigated on the merits, to shed light on different aspects of copyright law. Below are my thoughts on what is interesting about these cases. Please note that this is in no ways meant to be a comprehensive analysis of the lawsuits. 3:22-cv-06823 – Whither transformative?
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.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
43(B)log
FEBRUARY 4, 2023
Fair uses tend to divide into buckets: justified by new work; justified by project. New work: Derivative work or embedding work: Cambpell v. Use is justified by context of being placed in new work. If the project is fine, it’s fine to repeat the project with additional works.
LexBlog IP
MAY 22, 2023
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. ” Goldsmith’s photograph was then licensed to Vanity Fair in 1984 for $400 as a “one time” “artist reference for an illustration.”
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.
JIPL Online
MARCH 15, 2021
Then, the post will predict how Netflix may shift its content practices, defense strategies, and settlement tactics as a result of their past litigation successes in copyright actions. 14] Before lawyers got involved, pressure from the photographer resulted in the granting of a licensing fee. [15] SETTLEMENT CASES.
LexBlog IP
FEBRUARY 28, 2022
A few years later, in 1984, Goldsmith’s agency, which had retained the rights to those images, licensed one of them to Vanity Fair for use in an article called “Purple Fame.” Controversy” [8] : The Litigation. Vanity Fair , in turn, commissioned Warhol to make a silkscreen using Goldsmith’s photograph. He did just that.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
98 
Let's personalize your content