Andy Warhol violated photographer’s copyright, Supreme Court rules

Exterior of the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., where the Supreme Court of the United States meets, photographed in March 2019. On May 18, the court ruled that Andy Warhol had in fact violated Lynn Goldsmith’s copyright on a photograph she took of the singer Prince. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, photo credit Marielam1. Shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.
Exterior of the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., where the Supreme Court of the United States meets, photographed in March 2019. On May 18, the court ruled that Andy Warhol had in fact violated Lynn Goldsmith’s copyright on a photograph she took of the singer Prince. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, photo credit Marielam1. Shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.
Exterior of the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, where the Supreme Court of the United States meets, photographed in March 2019. On May 18, the court ruled that the late artist Andy Warhol had in fact violated Lynn Goldsmith’s copyright on a photograph she took of the singer Prince. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, photo credit Marielam1. Shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

WASHINGTON (AP) — On May 18, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a photographer who claimed the late Andy Warhol had violated her copyright on a photograph of the singer Prince. “Lynn Goldsmith’s original works, like those of other photographers, are entitled to copyright protection, even against famous artists,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in an opinion joined by six of her colleagues.

Continue reading

Andy Warhol, Prince at center of Supreme Court copyright case

The musician Prince, photographed in October 2009 in Paris. Both he and Andy Warhol are under discussion in a case before the Supreme Court of the United States regarding aspects of copyright law that govern the concept of ‘fair use.’ Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons, photo credit Nicolas Genin. Shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.
Left, Andy Warhol photographed in Stockholm, Sweden in February 1968, ahead of the opening of a retrospective of his work; right, the musician Prince, photographed in October 2009 in Paris. Both deceased artists are under discussion in a case before the Supreme Court of the United States regarding aspects of copyright law that govern the concept of ‘fair use.’ Both images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons. The Warhol photo is credited to Lasse Olsson / Pressens bild and the Prince photo to Nicolas Genin. The Warhol photo is in the public domain in Sweden and the United States, according to Wikimedia Commons. The Prince photo is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.
Left, Andy Warhol photographed in Stockholm, Sweden in February 1968, before the debut of a retrospective of his work; right, the musician Prince, photographed in October 2009 in Paris. Both artists are under discussion in a case before the Supreme Court of the United States on aspects of copyright law and ‘fair use.’ Both images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons. The Warhol photo is credited to Lasse Olsson / Pressens bild and the Prince photo to Nicolas Genin. The Warhol photo is in the public domain in Sweden and the United States, according to Wikimedia Commons. The Prince photo is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

WASHINGTON (AP) – Andy Warhol and Prince held center stage in a copyright case before the Supreme Court on October 12 that veered from Cheerios and Mona Lisa analogies to Justice Clarence Thomas’ enthusiasm for the Purple Rain showman. Despite the light nature of the arguments at times involving two deceased celebrities, the issue before the court is a serious one for the art world: When should artists be paid for original work that is then transformed by others, such as a movie adaptation of a book?

Continue reading