Intellectual Property Law Blog

JUNE 5, 2023

3] The Court found that the Warhol Foundation’s licensing of the Orange Prince to Conde Nast did not have a sufficiently different purpose as the Goldsmith photograph because both were “portraits of Prince used in magazines to illustrate stories about Prince.” [4] 13] AWF’s use was commercial because AWF licensed the artwork for a fee. [14]

Fair Use 130

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 130

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

MAY 30, 2022

Finally, it points out Viacom is the owner of three valid trademark registrations for the KRUSTY KRAB mark and 400 copyright registrations covering “creative aspects of the SpongeBob SquarePants franchise,” including episodes from the animated television series, movies, drawings, and stylebooks featuring artwork from the franchise.

Blogging 111

Blogging Social Media Television Fair Use 111

LexBlog IP

JUNE 5, 2023

3] The Court found that the Warhol Foundation’s licensing of the Orange Prince to Conde Nast did not have a sufficiently different purpose as the Goldsmith photograph because both were “portraits of Prince used in magazines to illustrate stories about Prince.” Goldsmith and, as a result, did not constitute fair use. [2]

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 26, 2023

3] The Court found that the Warhol Foundation’s licensing of the Orange Prince to Conde Nast did not have a sufficiently different purpose as the Goldsmith photograph because both were “portraits of Prince used in magazines to illustrate stories about Prince.” Goldsmith and, as a result, did not constitute fair use. [2]

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52