Remove 2023 Remove Derivative Work Remove Fair Use
article thumbnail

Supreme Court Finds Warhol’s Commercial Licensing of “Orange Prince” to Vanity Fair Is Not Fair Use and Infringes Goldsmith’s Famed Rock Photo

Intellectual Property Law Blog

On May 18, 2023, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of famed rock photographer Lynn Goldsmith against the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc.’s 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]

Fair Use 130
article thumbnail

How Original! The Oscars and the Craft of Derivative Works

Trademark and Copyright Law Blog

In addition to the Oscar contenders, the majority of 2023’s highest grossing films , from Across the Spider-Verse to The Super Mario Bros Movie , were based on preexisting IP and adapted for the big screen. One aspect of copyright law that makes adaptations attractive is derivative works. How has this come to be? In Yonay v.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Vindicates Photographer But Destabilizes Fair Use — Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

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. 21-869 (May 18, 2023). Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc.

article thumbnail

Let’s Go Hazy: Making Sense of Fair Use After Warhol

Copyright Lately

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.

article thumbnail

Court to Revisit Fair Use in Tattoo Infringement Case

Copyright Lately

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.”

article thumbnail

Copyright Parody Exception Denied Due to Defendant’s Discriminatory Use

TorrentFreak

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. .” Campbell v.

Copyright 141
article thumbnail

Generative AI: admissibility and infringement in the two US class actions against Meta’s LLaMA

Kluwer Copyright Blog

The plaintiffs’ factual allegations in Kadrey v Meta and Chabon v Meta The first class action, Kadrey v Meta ( here ), was filed on 7 July 2023, in U.S. The second class action, Chabon v Meta, was filed on 12 September 2023 before the same court ( here ). District Court for the Northern District of California – San Francisco Division.