Remove 2023 Remove Fair Use Remove Licensing Remove Marketing
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

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.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Fair Use: Graham v. Prince and Warhol v. Goldsmith

LexBlog IP

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.

article thumbnail

using competitor's images in comparative advertising is fair use even when appearance isn't being compared

43(B)log

LLC, 2023 WL 3066119, No. 24, 2023) “This case arises out of alleged misuse of copyrighted images, eventually leading to a dispute … that resulted in false business reviews, malicious e-mails, and mutual efforts to interfere with each other’s business.” The parties compete in the market for skid steer attachments and other products.

article thumbnail

Use of Warhol’s Prince Image Found Not to Be Sufficiently Transformative for Fair Use 

LexBlog IP

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court found that artistic changes to a pre-existing work, alone, not necessarily sufficient to make a derivative work fair use. copyright law, the Supreme Court focused on the actual use made, i.e. what the user does with the original work. copyright law. Copyright law in the U.S.

article thumbnail

No Free Use in the Purple Rain – U.S. Supreme Court Finds License of Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” Infringes Photographer’s Copyright

LexBlog IP

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. The first factor of fair use considers the nature of and reasons for a copier’s use of an original work. [4]

article thumbnail

What Goldsmith Means to AI Trainers

IP Intelligence

Sy Damle, (2016-2018 General Counsel) testified that “the training of AI models will generally fall within the established bounds of fair use.” (S. 1258, (2023). At the time Goldsmith was also licensing her original photograph to several magazines that were also writing articles about Prince’s life and music.

Fair Use 105