Supreme Court Rules Against Warhol Art

[Luv2play]

I posted this here because we don't appear to have a forum for fine art but Warhol appears in many museums. Today the SCOTUS ruled that a Warhol portrait of the pop star Prince infringed the copyright of the photographer Ms. Goldsmith, a well known photog of rock stars.

Imo this is a deplorable decision as it failed to credit the transformative nature of Warhol's work, which would have exempted the original photograph from copyright protection. If you compare the two works, which are shown in the NY Times report, at least to me ot seems that Warhol transformed a rather prosaic portrait of Prince into an arresting image that conveyed Prince's work, Purple Rain. This is what Andy was commissioned to do. 

Btw Andy never got the $10,000 that was paid by Vogue but his estate did. The photographer was paid $400. It was decided 7 to 2. I hope other countries don't follow this precedent. A former Canadian Supreme Court justice ( ours retire) said yesterday that the US Supreme Court is not influencing others as much as it once did in the last century.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Luv2play

[Guest]

Which Supreme Court?

[mike carey]

16 hours ago, Luv2play said:

Today the SCOTUS ruled ...

4 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

Which Supreme Court?

 

[Guest]

Thanks, @mike carey. It appears I was too precipitate with my query. 😉