Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 05 JUNE 2023

The SCOTUS Decision In Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith*

Kochhar & Co.
Kochhar & Co.
Contributor
Kochhar & Co.

Kochhar & Co.

Kochhar & Co has one of the largest full service commercial law practices in Bangalore. The firm...

View firm profile
Explore more from Kochhar & Co.

Lynn Goldsmith photographed the rock musician Prince during a concert at the Palladium in New York City in the year 1981.

IndiaIntellectual Property
Daksh Kumar
Daksh Kumar
Sahil Arora
Sahil Arora
Author LinkedIn connections

Lynn Goldsmith photographed the rock musician Prince during a concert at the Palladium in New York City in the year 1981. After Prince's 1984 Purple Rain album release, Condé Nast magazine Vanity Fair licenced a single black and white full-length portrait photograph (previously unpublished) for a planned feature as an artistic reference for an illustration that would only be used once. Further, "Purple Fame" was illustrated by Andy Warhol through colourized silkscreens of Prince's skull between 1984 and 1987, terming it the "Prince Series". This comprised multiple distinct works (16) including the one used in Vanity Fair magazine. The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts (AWF) maintained all 16 of Warhol's private works after his death. The Prince Series has been displayed since at inter alia the Museum of Modern Art, Tate, and the Andy Warhol Museum.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Copy, Right? ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC

When an artificial intelligence system is trained on copyrighted news content, and later answers a user’s question using what it learned, has the law been broken? On 24th July 2026, the Delhi High Court answered that question, at least for now. In ANI Media Pvt. Ltd. v. Open AI OpCo LLC, Justice Amit Bansal declined to grant an interim injunction against OpenAI, holding, on a prima facie, interim stage view, that the company’s use of ANI’s news content to train its large language models (“LLMs”) falls within the fair dealing exception under Section 52(1)(a) of the Copyright Act, 1957
IndiaIntellectual Property
S.S. Rana & Co.
S.S. Rana & Co.
Article

Discharge And Framing Of Charge Under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023: Reform Or Restatement?

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) has replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, raising critical questions about whether the law on discharge and framing of charges has fundamentally changed. While the substantive principles remain largely continuous with established jurisprudence, the BNSS introduces important procedural timelines and electronic hearing provisions that courts and advocates must navigate carefully. This analysis examines the continuity of legal standards, the new proc
IndiaCriminal Law
Kochhar & Co.
Kochhar & Co.