Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
All Is Not Fair In Love and Warhol
Courts have said time and again that the fair use doctrine may be "'the most troublesome in the whole law of copyright.'" See, e.g., Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google Inc., 886 F.3d 1179, 1191 (Fed. Cir. 2018) [internal citations omitted], rev'd on other grounds, 141 S. Ct. 1183 (2021). The Supreme Court's May 18, 2023 decision, which seeks to clarify what is or is not "transformative use" under the law, affirmed The Andy Warhol Found. for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 11 F.4th 26 (2d Cir. 2021), finding no fair use. In the process, the Supreme Court adds a new layer of analysis in deciding what is or is not fair. The decision has also generated considerable controversy between Justice Sotomayor, who wrote for the majority, and Justice Kagan, who wrote a stinging dissent. What is clear is that the label "transformative" is no longer a get-out-of-jail-free card; instead, a new balance must be struck between the new use and the exclusive right of authors to make derivative works, and part of that balance includes a clearer focus on the statutory fair use factors (education, comment and criticism) as well as the commercial nature or not of the new work. As a practical matter, how much the decision changes in this "troublesome" area remains to be seen.
In Andy Warhol Found., iconic pop-artist Andy Warhol made a series of silk screens and drawings based on a photograph of Prince, taken by Lynn Goldsmith (in particular adding some of his recognizable flourishes). Both the original and the reworked photos were used as magazine covers. The Second Circuit had overturned the district court grant of summary judgment of fair use, holding instead that, Warhol infringed the copyrighted photograph. The Second Circuit concluded the district court erroneously focused on the subjective meanings of the works, reasoning instead that "the court cannot assume the role of art critic and seek to ascertain the intent behind or meaning of the works at issue." 11 F.4th at 41. Said the court:
Though it may well have been Goldsmith's subjective intent to portray Prince as a "vulnerable human being" and Warhol's to strip Prince of that humanity and instead display him as a popular icon, whether a work is transformative cannot turn merely on the stated or perceived intent of the artist or the meaning or impression that a critic — or for that matter, a judge — draws from the work. Were it otherwise, the law may well "recogniz[e] any alteration as transformative." [Citation omitted.]
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.