Remove Artwork Remove Copying Remove Fair Use
article thumbnail

Supreme Court Rules adaption of Warhol print not “fair use”

Indiana Intellectual Property Law

Supreme Court has ruled that Andy Warhol’s orange silkscreen portrait of musician Prince, adapted from a photograph by Lynn Goldsmith, does not qualify as “fair use” under copyright law. The commercial nature of the copying further weighed against fair use. Continue reading

article thumbnail

SCOTUS Rules Andy Warhol’s Prince Portraits Are Not Fair Use

The IP Law Blog

Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Andy Warhol’s portraits of music legend Prince did not qualify as fair use under copyright law. The decision affirms a previous ruling by the Second Circuit, which found that Warhol’s artwork shared the same commercial purpose as the original photograph taken by photographer Lynn Goldsmith.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

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

Atari’s Copyright Claim Against State Farm Survives Challenge

Copyright Lately

I first wrote about this case back in March , when Atari filed a complaint accusing State Farm and its advertising partners of improperly appropriating artwork from Atari’s 1983 arcade game “Crystal Castles” for a 6-second online video advertisement. For example, in Gottlieb v. Conversely, in Ringgold v.

Fair Use 102
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

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] The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Campbell v.

Fair Use 130
article thumbnail

IPSC Closing Plenary: Fair Use After Warhol

43(B)log

Is this relevant to fair use? Satire involves using the same style to clothe different ideas; therefore it shouldn’t infringe (lack of substantial similarity as in the Greatest American Hero case; German case law; perhaps the jury’s reasoning in the Kat von D case). Writing ad copy, which authors need to sell their works.

article thumbnail

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

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Copy-reliant technologies have banked heavily on that principle over recent years and it wouldn’t be a stretch to say that the principle of non-expressive use has become the legal foundation of how the internet essentially works. Litigation against these models has piled up at the same breakneck speed as they have gained ground.

Fair Use 108