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] It found that all four fair use factors weighed against fair use. [12] Goldsmith counterclaimed for copyright infringement.

Fair Use 97

Fair Use Derivative Work Art Licensing 97

JIPL Online

MARCH 15, 2021

The Conan Doyle estate, heirs to the author of the works about the famed detective Sherlock Holmes, alleged that Netflix infringed on the character Sherlock Holmes in its portrayal of Sherlock Holmes in the 2020 movie “Enola Holmes.” [2] 5] Netflix and the estate quickly settled. [6]. 5] Netflix and the estate quickly settled. [6].

Copyright Infringement 98

Copyright Infringement Copyright Public Domain Derivative Work 98

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. By Guest Blogger Tyler Ochoa By a 7-2 vote, the U.S. Goldsmith , No. 569 (1994).

Fair Use 96

Fair Use Derivative Work Blogging Licensing 96

JIPEL Copyright Blog

MARCH 9, 2022

From July 2017 to April 2018, the Art Gallery of Ontario (the “AGO”) staged an exhibition titled “ ReBlink ,” which urged visitors to “[t]ake a second look… with a modern lens:”. addition of written or pictorial elements) of a work not in the public domain and/or where the creator is still alive.

Moral Rights 52

Moral Rights Fair Use Art Social Media 52

Copyright Lately

OCTOBER 25, 2021

The judge rejected BMG’s fair use defense, holding that the defendants took more elements from the “Nightmare on Elm” street films than they needed to accomplish any parodic purpose. New Line successfully moved for a preliminary injunction to block the video’s release. “The Conjuring” (2013).

Copyright 144

Copyright Cinema Copying Copyright Infringement 144

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 10, 2024

is] that works produced for the U.S. Government by its officers and employees should not be subject to copyright” and fall “in the public domain.” ” US Const., . “The basic premise of [S]ection 105.[is] ” H.R. 94-1476 at 58 (1976); see also Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 140 S.

Ownership 52

Ownership Copyright Government Intellectual Property 52