OT: U.S. Supreme Court takes up Warhol Copyright Infringement Case

Question

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a Warhol copyright infringement case that has been bouncing around the courts since 2017.
https://hyperallergic.com/721169/andy-warhol-copyright-dispute-reaches-supreme-court/
 
This high-stakes case, which asks whether Warhol’s appropriation of Lynn Goldsmith’s 1981 photograph of Prince in 15 silkscreens & drawings known as the "Prince series" qualifies as fair use.  The outcome will have significant implications for artists who use copyrighted materials in their own artworks.

Stay tuned...

Nancy OShea · Accepted Answer

This much-awaited Supreme Court decision has just changed the future of art:

https://www.artnews.com/art-in-america/columns/supreme-court-andy-warhol-decision-appropriation-artists-impact-1234669718/

"The majority decision reduced Warhol to an 'Instagram filter'."

"Any artist who works with existing imagery should now reconsider their practice. Hire a lawyer, maybe try to negotiate a license and be ready to move on if you get turned away or can’t afford the fee. The safest and cheapest route—a consideration particularly relevant to younger artists and those who are not rich and famous—is to just steer clear of referencing existing work."

J E L · Answer

I've been on Lynn's side of this since the beginning. As I see it, Warhol used her photo beyond the Vanity Fair license agreement without permission. Had he simply asked her if he could continue to use her image as a reference to create his subsequent series, and she agreed (with a proper license, of course), we wouldn't be here, some 38 years later!

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded