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. Andy Warhol Foundation v.

Fair Use 96

Fair Use Licensing Copying Artwork 96

Copyright Lately

AUGUST 14, 2023

Fischer denied both parties’ motions for summary judgment, finding triable issues of substantial similarity and fair use. Among other things, the court held that there was a factual dispute as to whether or not defendants’ purpose in using Sedlik’s image of Miles Davis was “commercial.”

Fair Use 91

Fair Use Social Media Licensing Marketing 91

Kluwer Copyright Blog

MAY 9, 2022

Orbison song could be fair use because it transformed the original song by adding something new, with a different purpose, or a new meaning or message. have grappled with how broadly or narrowly to interpret the concept of transformativeness when assessing fair use defenses to charges of copyright infringement.

Fair Use 100

Fair Use Derivative Work Art Licensing 100

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] Vanity Fair , in turn, commissioned Warhol to make a silkscreen using Goldsmith’s photograph. He did just that.

Fair Use 97

Fair Use Derivative Work Art Licensing 97

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

JUNE 20, 2023

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. This has important implications for the doctrine of fair use.

Fair Use 98

Fair Use Derivative Work Blogging Licensing 98

Plagiarism Today

SEPTEMBER 28, 2021

” The case raises questions of fair use and whether the new paintings were transformative enough to be non-infringing or if they were simply derivative works. Three years later, she licensed one of those photos of Vanity Fair who, with permission, commissioned a new work based on it by Andy Warhol. Bottom Line.

Fair Use 279

Fair Use Non-Fungible Tokens Copyright Derivative Work 279

Plagiarism Today

OCTOBER 26, 2021

Wtf is a juice demon pic.twitter.com/OxYMWEuoCq — Eli Matthewson (@EliMatthewson) October 1, 2016. If the costume isn’t licensed, why is it not infringing regardless of the name change? In short, Juice Demon is Juice Demon because he can’t be Beetlejuice, not without a license. Why did the company do this?

Trademark 279

Trademark Copyright Cease and Desist Copying 279

JD Supra Law

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. Dawn Jackson is a co-author of this post and is a Summer Associate at Bradley. By: Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Fair Use 55

Fair Use Art Licensing 55

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

Fair Use 57

Fair Use Derivative Work Copying Licensing 57

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.”

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Art Derivative Work Copyright Infringement 52

BYU Copyright Blog

JANUARY 24, 2022

In its Answer, Chegg asserts multiple defenses, including that “any use of Pearson’s asserted copyrighted works by or through Chegg’s services constitutes fair use.” Chegg does not provide further details to support its fair use claim.Chegg also asserted the equitable estoppel doctrine.

Fair Use 95

Fair Use Licensing Copyright Infringement Publishing 95

Kashishipr

JUNE 9, 2021

With the onset of the trend wherein users are gradually switching to online streaming to meet their music needs and discarding traditional methods such as radio, television, and music CDs, compulsory licensing for the internet was recognized as a key policy issue by the music industry last year. Background. The Plaintiff, Tips Industries Ltd.,

Music 98

Music Licensing Television Copyright Infringement 98

IP Intelligence

JUNE 7, 2023

Sy Damle, (2016-2018 General Counsel) testified that “the training of AI models will generally fall within the established bounds of fair use.” (S. At the time Goldsmith was also licensing her original photograph to several magazines that were also writing articles about Prince’s life and music. Goldsmith , 598 S.

Fair Use 105

Fair Use Licensing Art Music 105

LexBlog IP

MAY 18, 2023

Goldsmith had issued a limited license for this purpose. The license stated her photograph could be used for reference, “one time only.” ” Turns out – in addition to the Vanity Fair illustration – Warhol made a series of 16 additional works derived from Goldsmith’s photo.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Licensing Copyright 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 7, 2023

A pair of copyright decisions issued in May, one involving the appropriation artist Richard Prince [1] and the other involving works portraying the musician known as Prince, explore and expand on the “fair use” defense to copyright infringement. On May 11, the U.S. 2] A week later, the U.S. 3] Graham v.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Art Licensing Copyright Infringement 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 5, 2023

’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 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 26, 2023

’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 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52

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. Goldsmith et al, Case No.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Copying Licensing 52

IPilogue

DECEMBER 9, 2022

In the verdict form the jury stated that Defendants had not proven fair use, the Plaintiff (Alexander) should receive $3,750 USD for actual losses from the Defendant’s use of the tattoo designs, and did not answer as to profits can be attributed to the Plaintiff for use of the tattoos. was released. Citing Muhammad-Ali v.

Fair Use 111

Fair Use Copying Licensing Copyright 111

Velocity of Content

AUGUST 9, 2022

Vanity Fair (magazine) took a license to use and modify the image for its magazine and hired Warhol to use his artistic talents to develop a new image. Goldsmith realized what had happened—that Warhol had made over a dozen works based on her photograph, the majority of which had not been licensed.

Fair Use 98

Fair Use Licensing Derivative Work Art 98

TorrentFreak

JANUARY 17, 2024

is one of the most interesting cases in history to rely on a fair use defense, arguing that the alleged infringement qualifies as a parody. ” 2 Live Crew had previously sought to license the track from Acuff-Rose to be used as a parody; Acuff-Rose refused and 2 Live Crew used it anyway. .”

Copyright 141

Copyright Derivative Work Fair Use Reporting 141

Olartemoure Blog

JANUARY 18, 2023

In 1984, Vanity Fair licensed one of her black-and-white studio portraits for $400 and commissioned Warhol to create a piece for a feature of Prince. He used a cropped photo based on one of Goldsmith’s images to create his artwork.

Copyright 98

Copyright Artwork Copyright Infringement Fair Use 98

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

FEBRUARY 15, 2025

In 2016, the defendant licensed the plaintiff’s Equine Boarding Forms Package, consisting of form releases for adults and minors. The license permitted the defendant to “copy, email and otherwise distribute the” forms but not post them to the web. The plaintiff is an Oregon law firm practicing equine law.

Contracts 52

Contracts Copyright Licensing Copyright Notice 52

IPilogue

SEPTEMBER 29, 2021

The series was originally commissioned by Vanity Fair after it bought the license of the photo portrait from Goldsmith. Goldsmith said she was not aware of Warhol’s work until Tribute magazine featured the image, without crediting her, when Prince passed away in 2016. The trial judge John G.

Copyright Infringement 105

Copyright Infringement Copyright Art Fair Use 105

LexBlog IP

MAY 24, 2023

Goldsmith , Opinion located here , the estate of deceased pop artist Andy Warhol argued its use of the photo at issue was fair use under the first of the four Fair Use test factors (the “purpose and character of the use”), because Warhol’s contributions were transformative, adding new expression, meaning, or message.

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Copyright Licensing Copying 40

JD Supra Law

MAY 23, 2023

On May 17th, 2023, the Supreme Court handed down a decision with potentially far-reaching consequences in the evolving landscape of copyright fair use, particularly for commercial works that reproduce copyrighted work.

Licensing 52

Licensing Copyright Fair Use 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

Yesterday, the Supreme Court held 7-2 that a specific use of Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” silk screen—based on a copyrighted photograph of Prince—was not fair use. The first factor did not apply to Warhol’s image as published in Condé Nast in 2016, so that specific use was not fair use.

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Derivative Work Licensing Copyright Infringement 40

WIPO Magazine

NOVEMBER 22, 2023

The decision upheld the claim by the celebrity photographer, Lynn Goldsmith, that the Andy Warhol Foundation (AWF) had infringed her copyright in a photo of the late entertainer Prince, when, after Prince’s death in 2016, the Foundation licensed an illustration by Andy Warhol based on that photo, to Vanity Fair for a cover.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Copyright 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

In 1984, Vanity Fair sought to license the photograph for an “artist reference” in a story about the musician. Goldsmith agreed to license a one-time use of the photograph with full attribution. scholarship, or research” [2] and is evaluated through multiple factors.

Licensing 52

Licensing Fair Use Copyright Derivative Work 52

SpicyIP

JANUARY 31, 2025

Since its inception in 2016, CIPRA has been executing various activities in furtherance of its goals, which include encouraging research in every area of the subject, promoting and spreading awareness about IPR among students and public at large with various practical approaches. International Public License.

Blogging 59

Blogging Intellectual Property Journalism Social Media 59

JD Supra Law

JULY 13, 2023

In May, the Supreme Court issued an unusually contentious 7-2 decision concerning the fair use defense available to alleged copyright infringers. The majority decision in The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Copyright Copyright Infringement Art 52

LexBlog IP

APRIL 18, 2022

Supreme Court recently granted a petition for writ of certiorari (docket, here ) to review the extent to which a work of art is a “transformative” fair use under the Copyright Act. Vanity Fair licensed one of Goldsmith’s Prince photographs to use in a Vanity Fair article.

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Copyright Art Copyright Law 40

TorrentFreak

MAY 15, 2023

” That wasn’t what Maria Schneider had in mind, according to her 2016 Music Tech Policy piece, which begins with a surprise apology. After all, it’s not fair to legal whorehouses that pay their share of taxes to lump them with meth labs and YouTube,” Schneider wrote. I apologize. In a submission to the U.S.

Copyright 145

Copyright Intellectual Property Business Licensing 145

LexBlog IP

OCTOBER 11, 2021

The live streamer is claiming that the content at issue should not have been taken down because it is fair use, considering that xQc was adding his own commentary and reactionary content to the clip. million viewers averaged in the preceding 2016 Rio de Janeiro Games. This, however, was not the case. In order to maximize the $7.75

Licensing 52

Licensing Copyright Intellectual Property IP 52

Velocity of Content

DECEMBER 4, 2024

Professor Paul Goldstein, for example, has argued that, in light of the enumeration, the statutory text is intended primarily to protect certain licensing markets. 44 (2016) (noting that a moral right of attribution on all categories of works is recognized in the copyright laws of Berne Convention member States and that it is a U.S.

Derivative Work 52

Derivative Work Copyright Moral Rights Copyright Law 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

AUGUST 13, 2021

Second Circuit reverses district court’s fair use declaration granted to Andy Warhol Foundation; artist’s works were not “transformative” and could harm the photographer’s market for licensing her image. was entitled to a declaration that Warhol’s “Prince Series” did not infringe Goldsmith’s photo.

Art 52

Art Fair Use Copyright Copyright Infringement 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

AUGUST 12, 2021

Second Circuit reverses district court’s fair use declaration granted to Andy Warhol Foundation; artist’s works were not “transformative” and could harm the photographer’s market for licensing her image. was entitled to a declaration that Warhol’s “Prince Series” did not infringe Goldsmith’s photo.

Art 52

Art Fair Use Copyright Copyright Infringement 52