Remove Derivative Work Remove Magazine Remove Marketing
article thumbnail

How to Distinguish Transformative Fair Uses From Infringing Derivative Works?

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Vanity Fair magazine had commissioned Warhol’s artwork in 1984 to accompany an article about the singer’s rise to fame based on Goldsmith’s photograph under a one-time-use “artist reference” license between Vanity Fair and Goldsmith’s agent. However, such uses must be licensed or be held unfair.

article thumbnail

Derivative works: the Adventures of Koons and Tintin in French copyright law

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Like most copyright systems, French copyright law does not leave much room for the freedom of authors of transformative graphic works (also called “derivative works”). Three interesting cases on derivative works, two involving Jeff Koons and one Tintin, have recently put French copyright law in the international spotlight (e.g.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Vindicates Photographer But Destabilizes Fair Use — Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Supreme Court affirmed the Second Circuit’s ruling that the reproduction of Andy Warhol’s Orange Prince on the cover of a magazine tribute was not a fair use of Lynn Goldsmith’s photo of the singer-songwriter Prince, on which the Warhol portrait was based. By Guest Blogger Tyler Ochoa By a 7-2 vote, the U.S.

article thumbnail

What Goldsmith Means to AI Trainers

IP Intelligence

At the time Goldsmith was also licensing her original photograph to several magazines that were also writing articles about Prince’s life and music. For example, Goldsmith licensed her photographs of Prince to illustrate stories about Prince in magazines such as Newsweek, Vanity Fair, and People.” at 1290 (Gorsuch, J., concurring).

Fair Use 105
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

2] The Court’s decision affirmed the ruling of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the Warhol work was derivative of the original, and noted that “the new expression may be relevant to whether a copying use has a sufficiently distinct purpose or character” but that factor was not dispositive by itself. [3]

Fair Use 130
article thumbnail

Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith: The Supreme Court Revisits Transformative Fair Uses

Kluwer Copyright Blog

Vanity Fair decided to publish an article about the rock singer Prince in a 1984 magazine. Vanity Fair then commissioned Andy Warhol to prepare an art work of Prince to accompany the article and supplied him with the Goldsmith photograph as a source material. The Court will review that decision in the fall of 2022.

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Holds Warhol’s “Orange Prince” Not Transformative, Not Fair Use

IP Tech Blog

When Prince passed away in 2016, the Andy Warhol Foundation (“AWF”) licensed “Orange Prince” for use on the cover of a commemorative magazine cover. Plainly the Warhol “Orange Prince” was a derivative work, but was there something about it that could support a finding of fair use?