Remove Fair Use Remove Licensing Remove Marketing Remove Technology
article thumbnail

Fourth Circuit Issues a Bummer Fair Use Ruling–Philpot v. IJR

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

In 2013, Philpot uploaded the photo to Wikimedia Commons, which is governed by the standard Creative Commons license requiring attribution. Philpot claims his standard photo licensing fee is $3,500, but reuses of the photo from Wikipedia Commons didn’t require any payment (just attribution). ” Market Effect.

article thumbnail

The Interplay Between Copyright Licensing and Exclusive Rights: AI Edition

Velocity of Content

This article originally appeared in The Scholarly Kitchen Copyright Licensing and Human Advancement Copyright licensing, that is, the granting of permission to reuse copyright works, has likely existed as long as copyright. Collective copyright licensing is nearly as old, generally viewed as dating from 1777.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Second Circuit Confirms Fair Use on Motion to Dismiss–Yang v. Mic

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The NY Post licensed the photo for its story, “ Why I won’t date hot women anymore.” The district court granted Mic’s motion to dismiss on fair use grounds. In a memo opinion, the Second Circuit affirms the fair use motion to dismiss. Nature of the Use. Market Effect. Case Citation : Yang v.

Fair Use 125
article thumbnail

When is it Fair Use to Use a Photo to “Illustrate” an Article?

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

One of the practices that has generated a sizeable number of disputes and rulings is the use of photos to illustrate articles. These three cases address fair use in this context. McGucken moved for summary judgment on the fair use defense. The second factor weighs slightly against fair use.

Fair Use 129
article thumbnail

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

IP Tech Blog

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, Andy Warhol not only used Ms. Goldsmith et al, Case No.

article thumbnail

Videogame Maker Has Implied License to Depict Copyrighted Tattoos–Hayden v. 2K

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

The jury needed only 90 minutes to determine that the defendants had proven their implied license defense, ending the case. Due to the fact-specific nature of doctrines like implied licenses and fair use, it’s possible the Hayden and Orton jury verdicts are consistent with each other.

article thumbnail

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

LexBlog IP

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. Goldsmith et al, Case No.