![]() ![]() The dispute stems back to the black-and-white photograph Goldsmith, considered a leading rock photographer, took of Prince in 1981, when he was an up-and-coming musician. "Namely, it was used in a story about Prince, not a story about Warhol." ![]() "Isn't the classic thing with a photograph that it'll be used in stories about the subject of the photograph and, therefore, competing in the same market that this adaptation was used in?" Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Roman Martinez, who argued on behalf of the Andy Warhol Foundation. Some of the justices at times questioned whether Warhol's illustration of Prince constituted fair use under the Copyright Act, since his and Goldsmith's photograph had a similar commercial purpose. In the past the Supreme Court has allowed fair use if the work is "transformative," that is, if it "adds something new, with a further purpose or different character, altering the first with new expression, meaning or message." The law also considers whether the use of a work is for commercial or noncommercial use. The court is weighing the foundation's claims that Warhol did not violate federal copyright law when he based a set of 16 silkscreens and sketches on Goldsmith's photo of Prince (who Justice Clarence Thomas revealed he was a fan of in the 1980s). The case could have ramifications for the entertainment industry and creators drawing inspiration from pre-existing works, and across more than 90 minutes of oral arguments, the justices invoked a number of cultural references, from "Lord of the Rings" to Norman Lear television shows to the Mona Lisa. Washington - The Supreme Court on Wednesday wrestled with a copyright fight between rock-and-roll photographer Lynn Goldsmith and the Andy Warhol Foundation over the late artist's use of her 1981 photo of Prince as the basis for a silkscreen image.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |