Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Problem With Sup. Ct. Majority Opinion In Andy Warhol Foundation
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.
In her majority opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor found that because both Goldsmith's "original photograph and AWF's copying use of it share substantially the same purpose" serving as "portraits of Prince used to depict Prince in magazine stories about Prince" and that AWF's copying was commercial in nature, the first fair-use factor of the Copyright Act's 17 U.S.C. §107 (i.e., "purpose and character of the use") favors Goldsmith, regardless of any "new expression" Warhol's "Orange Prince" may have added to Goldsmith's original photograph. The court further clarified that commercial purpose under §107(1) is not dispositive but instead "is to be weighed against the degree to which the use has a further purpose or different character."
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
Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
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.
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.
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.
Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.