The Impact of the Supreme Court's Warhol Ruling on Art.

TL;DR Summary
The Supreme Court ruled that Andy Warhol's "Prince Series" is not transformative enough to count as "fair use" of Lynn Goldsmith's photograph of Prince. Justice Elena Kagan passionately dissented, warning that the ruling will stifle creativity. However, the art world may be on the Court's side, as anti-appropriation is a common theme these days. The renewed obsession with copyright and proprietary notions about art comes at a time of deep artistic insecurity, with AI creating images daily based on tens of millions of "remembered" images.
- Warhol Against the Supreme Court and Beyond Vulture
- Analysis | The Court's Warhol-Prince Ruling Is Pro-Artist, Anti-Art The Washington Post
- Warhold Archives - Alan Cross' A Journal of Musical Things A Journal of Musical Things
- What the Supreme Court's Andy Warhol decision could mean for art Los Angeles Times
- Ruling Against Warhol Shouldn't Hurt Artists. But It Might. The New York Times
Reading Insights
Total Reads
0
Unique Readers
0
Time Saved
4 min
vs 5 min read
Condensed
91%
902 → 85 words
Want the full story? Read the original article
Read on Vulture