Follow Us

Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Copyrights Entertainment and Sports Law United States Supreme Court

The Problem With Sup. Ct. Majority Opinion In Andy Warhol Foundation

Commentary

The high court’s decision’s future application is anything but clear and clarification of the parameters of a “transformative” fair use is left open for another day.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In deciding whether Andy Warhol Foundation’s (AWF) licensing of Warhol’s iconic “Orange Prince” silkscreen was a copyright fair use of Lynn Goldsmith’s source photo of the musician Prince, the U.S. Supreme Court focused not on Warhol’s original use of Goldsmith’s photo in creating “Orange Prince” but rather on Goldsmith’s specific challenge to AWF’s licensing of the work to magazine publisher Condé Nast. Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc. v. Goldsmith, 14 S.Ct. 1258 (2023). The high court’s decision’s future application is anything but clear and clarification of the parameters of a “transformative” fair use is left open for another day.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.

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

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Subscribe Now For Unlimited Access

Read These Next