Supreme Court Rules Against Andy Warhol Estate in Prince Portrait Copyright Case

The Supreme Courtroom dominated Thursday that Andy Warhol’s silkscreen portrait of Prince infringed on photographer Lynn Goldsmith’s copyright, NBC Information experiences. The courtroom’s 7-2 resolution, authored by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, famous that Warhol’s work didn’t represent “truthful use” as each pictures held the identical business function: to accompany journal articles about Prince. Pitchfork has reached out to the Andy Warhol Basis and Lynn Goldsmith for remark.

Warhol created a brightly coloured remedy of Goldsmith’s 1981 black and white {photograph} for Vainness Honest’s November 1984 challenge; it was printed with permission from Goldsmith. Nevertheless, completely different unlicensed pictures had been created by Warhol and printed within the journal’s 2016 Prince tribute. The Andy Warhol Basis approved their publication, and Goldsmith wasn’t credited.

Goldsmith and the Warhol Basis sued one another in 2017, and in 2019, a federal decide dominated within the basis’s favor. On the time, the decide claimed that Warhol’s work was transformative. In 2021, an appeals courtroom dominated in Goldsmith’s favor, prompting the Warhol Basis to hunt a Supreme Courtroom overview.

“We respectfully disagree with the Courtroom’s ruling that the 2016 licensing of Orange Prince was not protected by the truthful use doctrine,” Joel Wachs, President of the Andy Warhol Basis for the Visible Arts, stated in an announcement. “On the similar time, we welcome the Courtroom’s clarification that its resolution is restricted to that single licensing and doesn’t query the legality of Andy Warhol’s creation of the Prince Collection in 1984. Going ahead, we’ll proceed standing up for the rights of artists to create transformative works below the Copyright Act and the First Modification.”

“I’m thrilled by right now’s resolution and grateful to the Supreme Courtroom for listening to our facet of the story,” Goldsmith stated in an announcement. She continued: 

It is a nice day for photographers and different artists who make a residing by licensing their artwork. This authorized battle has been a protracted street at nice emotional and monetary affect upon me and my household. I felt I needed to danger every thing we had financially so as combat within the courts for cover of my rights and people of all within the arts in opposition to those that would infringe. I hope this SCOTUS ruling is a lesson that folks shouldn’t draw back from legally standing up for his or her rights when organizations, foundations, or people who’ve larger monetary sources intimidate them with authorized prices. It’s simple to overwhelm particular person creators who simply need to make their work and never go through the emotional and expensive authorized battle to face up for his or her rights. I need to thank the workforce at Williams & Connolly, particularly Lisa Blatt and Tom Hentoff, for sticking with me from the lows to this unimaginable excessive.