Music Groups Call Supreme Court Ruling in Warhol Case a 'Massive Victory' For The Business

  • 📰 RollingStone
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 42 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 20%
  • Publisher: 51%

대한민국 뉴스 뉴스

대한민국 최근 뉴스,대한민국 헤드 라인

In a case with potential implications on a wide range of creative industries, the Supreme Court ruled that Andy Warhol infringed on a photographer’s copyrights for his portraits of Prince.

in favor of Lynn Goldsmith, whose photos of The Purple One were the original works, which Warhol then used for his own artwork. The court went against the Warhol Foundation’s argument that Warhol’s work was “transformative” enough that they were substantially different and constituted fair use.commissioned Goldsmith to photograph Prince in 1981. In 1984,got a license to use Goldsmith’s photo for an illustration, for which they commissioned Warhol.

Writing the court’s majority opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor contended that the intent in Warhol’s portrait wasn’t significantly different than Goldsmiths’s as they were both commercial art of Prince intended for a magazine. Such a distinction may not apply to other famous Warhol works like his Campbell’s Soup art, she wrote, given that the soup cans are commercial while Warhol’s work was artistic commentary.

“The use of a copyrighted work may nevertheless be fair if, among other things, the use has a purpose and character that is sufficiently distinct from the original,” Sotomayor wrote. “In this case, however, Goldsmith’s photograph of Prince, and AWF’s copying use of the photograph in an image licensed to a special edition magazine devoted to Prince, share substantially the same commercial purpose.”

 

귀하의 의견에 감사드립니다. 귀하의 의견은 검토 후 게시됩니다.
이 소식을 빠르게 읽을 수 있도록 요약했습니다. 뉴스에 관심이 있으시면 여기에서 전문을 읽으실 수 있습니다. 더 많은 것을 읽으십시오:

 /  🏆 483. in KR

대한민국 최근 뉴스, 대한민국 헤드 라인