2013 Copying Derivative Work Fair Use 
Copyright Lately
MAY 22, 2023
Five things to know about the Supreme Court’s new purpose-driven fair use opinion in Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (“ Warhol “) is that relatively rare fair use case in which both the original and follow-on works were more or less directly competing in the same market.
LexBlog IP
FEBRUARY 28, 2022
1] That decision shook the art world, as it seems to dramatically narrow the scope of the fair use doctrine, and raises doubts about the lawfulness of many existing works. [2] 9] In reaching that determination, the court relied chiefly on the Second Circuit’s 2013 decision in Cariou v.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
SpicyIP
JUNE 26, 2024
On a broad reading, there seems to be an obvious conflict of two areas of law, where the RPwD Act mandates fundamental access to all content but the Copyright Act grants the author the right to control how their works are copied.
Patently-O
OCTOBER 11, 2022
On October 12, 2022, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the fair use copyright case of Andy Warhol Foundation, Inc. Andy Warhol admittedly used Lynn Goldmith’s copyrighted photographs of Prince as the basis for his set of sixteen silkscreens. by Dennis Crouch. Goldsmith , Docket No. 21-869 (2022). 3d 694 (2d Cir.
JIPL Online
APRIL 9, 2021
On one hand, those who view intellectual property rights as a limited monopoly would suggest that even derivative use of the content in a meme is infringement on the rights holder’s interest. i] Kelsey Skager, What are Memes & Can You Use Them in Marketing? 29, 2013), [link]. [ii] 1, 2013), [link].
LexBlog IP
OCTOBER 25, 2023
The copyright claims came down to a fair use analysis, something that has occupied discussions by this poster before. ” With a mixed bag present on the substantial similarity analysis, the District Court moved on to looking at fair use itself. .” Let’s see why.
Copyright Lately
OCTOBER 3, 2022
Despite a number of solid affirmative defenses—including implied license, de minimis use and waiver—the jury was only asked to determine whether defendants had proven that their conduct qualified as a fair use under the Copyright Act. That $3,750 works out to a measly $71 for each month the case has been pending.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
92 
Let's personalize your content