Copyright Lately

MAY 22, 2023

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.

Fair Use 91

Fair Use Licensing Copying Artwork 91

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 28, 2022

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] Controversy” [8] : The Litigation.

Fair Use 97

Fair Use Derivative Work Art Licensing 97

Copyright Lately

AUGUST 14, 2023

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.”

Fair Use 87

Fair Use Social Media Licensing Marketing 87

IP Tech Blog

JUNE 2, 2023

The Supreme Court recently upheld an appellate court’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s use of a photograph of Prince as a reference for a collection of screen prints is not fair use – to the extent his foundation decided to license them at least. Goldsmith et al, Case No. Unbeknownst to Ms.

Fair Use 57

Fair Use Derivative Work Copying Licensing 57

43(B)log

FEBRUARY 4, 2023

A Few Words for a Lost Friend: Tribute to Dmitry Karshtedt (Bob Brauneis, Mark Lemley, Jake Sherkow) Closing Plenary Session: Fair use Robert Brauneis, Copyright Transactions in the Shadow of Fair Use Suppose a work does not infringe another work because and only because it’s been ruled a fair use.

Fair Use 59

Fair Use Derivative Work Copying Marketing 59

LexBlog IP

MAY 18, 2023

In 1981 Andy Warhol used a photograph made by Lynn Goldsmith as reference for an illustration of the musician Prince. Vanity Fair magazine had hired Warhol to make the illustration; it was to accompany an article about Prince in the magazine’s November 1984 issue. The District Court held in AWF’s favor.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Licensing Copyright 52

43(B)log

AUGUST 9, 2024

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). W/o fair use, these tools are far more limited.

Fair Use 59

Fair Use Marketing Marketing Licensing 59

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

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.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Copyright Law Art 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 2, 2023

The Supreme Court recently upheld an appellate court’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s use of a photograph of Prince as a reference for a collection of screen prints is not fair use – to the extent his foundation decided to license them at least. Goldsmith et al, Case No. ” Unbeknownst to Ms.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Copying Licensing 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 25, 2023

Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Andy Warhol’s portraits of music legend Prince did not qualify as fair use under copyright law. In a 7-2 decision, the high court sided with Goldsmith’s argument that Warhol’s “Orange Prince” constituted an infringing derivative work of her copyrighted photograph.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Artwork Copyright Law 52

IP Intelligence

JUNE 7, 2023

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

Fair Use 105

Fair Use Licensing Art Music 105

LexBlog IP

MAY 22, 2023

The Supreme Court ruled on May 18 that Andy Warhol’s “Orange Prince” work of pop art was not a fair use when licensed to Condé Nast in 2016. Apparently, Warhol had created an entire series of 15 other works of pop art using Goldsmith’s initial photograph. § 107 ).

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Art Derivative Work Copyright Infringement 52

Velocity of Content

AUGUST 9, 2022

Goldsmith took the black and white photograph, using her artistic expression to try to capture a certain imagery. Vanity Fair (magazine) took a license to use and modify the image for its magazine and hired Warhol to use his artistic talents to develop a new image. The case is important for several reasons.

Fair Use 98

Fair Use Licensing Derivative Work Art 98

LexBlog IP

JULY 7, 2023

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.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Art Licensing Copyright Infringement 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 5, 2023

’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] 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

’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] 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 19, 2023

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.

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Derivative Work Licensing Copyright Infringement 40

IP Tech Blog

AUGUST 4, 2023

As many will recall, SCOTUS recently upheld a ruling that an early 1980s Andy Warhol’s photograph of the artist Prince was not fair use. It’s a way where you take your original work and add new expression to it. Looking forward, what do we say about other fair uses?

Art 52

Art Fair Use Derivative Work Blogging 52

LexBlog IP

AUGUST 4, 2023

21-869, as part of INDICAM ’s podcast series “IPxSUMMER 2023 around the world” As many will recall, SCOTUS recently upheld a ruling that an early 1980s Andy Warhol’s photograph of the artist Prince was not fair use. one of the copyright rights is the right to prepare derivate works (e.g.,

Art 52

Art Fair Use Derivative Work IP 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 5, 2023

Warhol and his Foundation’s claim of fair use lost. The case began after Prince died in 2016, when Vanity Fair magazine’s parent company, Condé Nast, published a special commemorative magazine celebrating his life. ” The license provided that the use would be for “one time” only.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Art Licensing 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

AUGUST 7, 2023

In 1984, Condé Nast, the publisher, obtained a license from Goldsmith to allow Andy Warhol to use her Prince portrait as the foundation for a single serigraphy to be featured in Vanity Fair magazine. In 2016, Condé Nast acquired a license from the Warhol Foundation to use the Prince Series as illustrations for a new magazine.

Copyright 52

Copyright Derivative Work Fair Use Copyright Law 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 31, 2023

The Court held that the first factor of the copyright fair use test favored respondent photographer, Lynn Goldsmith, rather than petitioner, Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts (“AWF”). Vanity Fair engaged Andy Warhol to create an illustration based on Goldsmith’s photograph for use in the magazine.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Copyright Editing 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

Goldsmith agreed to license a one-time use of the photograph with full attribution. Vanity Fair commissioned Andy Warhol to create a silkscreen using Goldsmith’s image and used Warhol’s piece in the magazine with attribution as promised. factor weighs in favor of fair use.

Licensing 52

Licensing Fair Use Copyright Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 7, 2023

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

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Art Music 52

IP Intelligence

JUNE 6, 2023

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

Fair Use 40

Fair Use Licensing Art Music 40

Kluwer Copyright Blog

JULY 16, 2023

.” 3) How to Distinguish Transformative Fair Uses From Infringing Derivative Works? Supreme Court agreed to review the Second Circuit’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s series of colorful prints and drawings of Prince were not transformative fair uses of Lynn Goldsmith’s photograph. It will focus on the s.10(3)

Blogging 52

Blogging Law IP Fair Use 52

Patently-O

OCTOBER 11, 2022

On October 12, 2022, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the fair use copyright case of Andy Warhol Foundation, Inc. Andy Warhol admittedly used Lynn Goldmith’s copyrighted photographs of Prince as the basis for his set of sixteen silkscreens. by Dennis Crouch. Goldsmith , Docket No. 21-869 (2022). 569 (1994).

Fair Use 134

Fair Use Copyright Derivative Work Art 134

LexBlog IP

OCTOBER 25, 2023

The copyright claims came down to a fair use analysis, something that has occupied discussions by this poster before. ” With a mixed bag present on the substantial similarity analysis, the District Court moved on to looking at fair use itself. That New York Times Magazine story about Larson v.

Copyright 52

Copyright Social Media Plagiarism Fair Use 52

43(B)log

FEBRUARY 2, 2024

Goldsmith SCOTUS understood the “use” to be the foundation’s commercial licensing. But licensing is neither a © use nor an act of infringement. Incoherent to raise/evaluate fair use as to an act that wasn’t a use or infringement. Sotomayor says, 8 times, that the use at issue is commercial licensing.

Fair Use 49

Fair Use Derivative Work Licensing Marketing 49

43(B)log

FEBRUARY 16, 2024

Ushered in sea change in terms of how it was used in art cases. For years, those cases had determined fair use by focusing largely on whether the secondary work was transformative: new meaning or message. Conceptual work is beneath the surface of the work. So: when do “uses” compete?

Derivative Work 59

Derivative Work Fair Use Art Marketing 59

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

FEBRUARY 13, 2023

Sixth, assuming Woodward published copyrighted material without Trump’s authorization, was he permitted to do so, either as a fair use, or by the First Amendment? 1981), which involved two interviews of the Reverend Jerry Falwell in 1980 that were published in Penthouse Magazine in March 1981. Penthouse Int’l, Inc. ,

Copyright 131

Copyright Blogging Publishing Fair Use 131

Copyright Lately

MARCH 6, 2023

The plaintiff is also asking the court to enjoin Coakley’s Director Statements and nascent “making of Runt ” film project, claiming that when Coakley sold Runt , he also sold the copyright to any of his future works related to Runt as well. Are Coakley’s Materials Infringing Derivative Works or Protected Fair Use?

Copyright 79

Copyright Derivative Work Fair Use Social Media 79

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 10, 2024

Those snippets seem arguably suggestive of an intent to use the former President’s input generously, perhaps more generously than fair use might otherwise allow, and in a manner often unvarnished or unprocessed to the point of being an author’s, or an author-like, contribution. Random House, Inc.

Ownership 52

Ownership Copyright Government Intellectual Property 52