Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
No Fair Use Seen In Artworks About Sid Vicious
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California decided that artworks based on a photograph of the late, infamous Sex Pistols band member Sid Vicious weren't copyright fair uses. Morris v. Guetta, CV12-00684. Thierry Guetta creates artwork using altered photographs of celebrities. Photographer Dennis Morris filed a copyright infringement suit over several Guetta exhibited-and-sold artworks based on Morris's photo of Sid Vicious angling his head and winking. Guetta's artwork alterations included using higher black-and-white contrast and increased facial detail, as well as two that added a mole and different hairstyle to Vicious's appearance and one in which Vicious appears in sunglasses.
District Judge John A. Kronstadt determined: “[I]t is not apparent that Defendants' works add something new, have a further purpose or are of a different character due to a new expression, meaning, or message. The Photograph is a picture of Sid Vicious making a distinct facial expression. Defendants' works are of Sid Vicious making that same expression. Most of Defendants' works add certain new elements, but the overall effect of each is not transformative; Defendants' works remain at their core pictures of Sid Vicious.”
Stan Soocher is Editor-in-Chief of Entertainment Law & Finance and a tenured Associate Professor of Music & Entertainment Industry Studies at the University of Colorado's Denver Campus. He can be reached at [email protected] or via www.stansoocher.com.
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California decided that artworks based on a photograph of the late, infamous Sex Pistols band member Sid Vicious weren't copyright fair uses. Morris v. Guetta, CV12-00684. Thierry Guetta creates artwork using altered photographs of celebrities. Photographer
District Judge John A. Kronstadt determined: “[I]t is not apparent that Defendants' works add something new, have a further purpose or are of a different character due to a new expression, meaning, or message. The Photograph is a picture of Sid Vicious making a distinct facial expression. Defendants' works are of Sid Vicious making that same expression. Most of Defendants' works add certain new elements, but the overall effect of each is not transformative; Defendants' works remain at their core pictures of Sid Vicious.”
Stan Soocher is Editor-in-Chief of Entertainment Law & Finance and a tenured Associate Professor of Music & Entertainment Industry Studies at the University of Colorado's Denver Campus. He can be reached at [email protected] or via www.stansoocher.com.
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
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.
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.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.