Remove Copying Remove Derivative Work Remove Fair Use Remove Presentation
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

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. Applying a new lens on how to view the purpose of a derivative work under U.S. copyright law. Copyright law in the U.S.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Prince, Prince, Prints: Will the Supreme Court Revisit Fair Use?

LexBlog IP

1] That decision shook the art world, as it seems to dramatically narrow the scope of the fair use doctrine, and raises doubts about the lawfulness of many existing works. [2] It found that all four fair use factors weighed against fair use. [12] Goldsmith counterclaimed for copyright infringement.

article thumbnail

Understanding the Pearson v. Chegg Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

Plagiarism Today

In the lawsuit, Pearson alleges that Chegg, through the use of thousands of freelancers, provides answers to questions found in textbooks it publishes and, in doing so, often copies the question verbatim or with slight paraphrasing. Not Covered by Copyright: This is a likely argument where just the answers are presented.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Holds Specific Use of Warhol’s “Orange Prince” Not Fair Use

LexBlog IP

Yesterday, the Supreme Court held 7-2 that a specific use of Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” silk screen—based on a copyrighted photograph of Prince—was not fair use. The first factor did not apply to Warhol’s image as published in Condé Nast in 2016, so that specific use was not fair use.

article thumbnail

Clarifying Copyright Fair Use in Commercialized and Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from Warhol v. Goldsmith

LexBlog IP

Clarifying Copyright Fair Use in Commercialized and Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from Warhol v. Goldsmith by Jaime Chandra Clarifying Fair Use in Commercialized & Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from the Warhol v. We’re talking about Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts, Inc. Table of Contents: Warhol v.

article thumbnail

First duel between NFTs and copyright before the Spanish courts: NFTs 1 – Authors 0

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Basically, because an NFT is an encoded digital metadata file of a copy of a work that can be copyright protected. That is, in an NFT there can be an underlying copy of a work of art –typically an image, photograph, piece of music, video or certain audiovisual content– that may be subject to copyright. And why is that?

Copyright 114