Remove Art Remove Artwork 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 to Distinguish Transformative Fair Uses From Infringing Derivative Works?

Kluwer Copyright Blog

“Warhol Print” (Vanity Fair), Page 8, Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. 2021) (available here ); “Warhol Print” also available here “Goldsmith Photograph”, Page 7, Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. Goldsmith, 11 F.4th 4th 26 (2d Cir. Goldsmith, 11 F.4th 4th 26 (2d Cir. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Justices Urged To Clarify Fair Use Through Warhol Art IP Row

IP Law 360

Supreme Court should establish a clear standard for fair use in a copyright battle over Andy Warhol artwork based on a photo of musician Prince, arguing it's a chance for the court to spell out what counts as a transformative work. The head of the American Bar Association's copyright division said Friday that the U.S.

article thumbnail

Fair Use for Documentaries in US Copyright Law: Brown v Netflix

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Chapman (‘plaintiffs’) collectively filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Netflix, Amazon, and Apple (‘defendants’), claiming that the defendants had directly and indirectly infringed their copyright over the song “ Fish Sticks n’ Tater Tots ” by using it in their documentary titled ‘Burlesque’ ( Brown v. Netflix , Inc. ).

Fair Use 105
article thumbnail

The stubborn memory of generative AI: overfitting, fair use, and the AI Act

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Of particular concern is the so-called commercial exception in Art. By April last year, over one billion pieces of artwork had been removed from the Stable Diffusion training set. Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay The sweeping evolution of generative AI models is rapidly reshaping the legal landscape of copyright.

Fair Use 117
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. Andy Warhol Foundation v.

article thumbnail

Using AI Artwork to Avoid Copyright Infringement

Copyright Lately

AI-generated art isn’t perfect, but it’s become a viable option for set decor on motion pictures and other commercial productions. Fair use and de minimis defenses are often unreliable, and even if you have a solid case, defending copyright infringement lawsuits is an expensive proposition.

Artwork 86