2023-05-29 21:13:14
6 minutes to read
Andy Warhol Foundation lost originality lawsuit to photographer Lynn Goldsmith; know the case
Andy Warhol (1928 – 1987) was a notable figure in art history, revolutionary and controversial in equal measure. Protagonist of Pop Art, artistic movement of the 1960s, with his work he challenged the traditional concepts of culture, exploring the frontier between art, the media and the consumer society.
Warhol appropriated symbols and images from the commercial and pop world to produce striking serigraphs and plasticized from an increasingly superficial world. Her production influenced the art world, but also shaped popular culture and the notion of fame and celebrity. His unique vision and ability to understand the present continue to inspire artists to challenge and subvert the boundaries of art.
Decades following his death, it is a court decision surrounding one of his works that shakes the art world once more, leaving a reflection that is so dear in the digital age: how to define the limits for image appropriation by art?
Or case “Orange Prince”
Orange Prince (1984) is the most iconic of twelve silkscreen works in Warhol’s Prince series. The works were produced from a photograph by Lynn Goldsmith that recorded the musician Prince in the early 1980s.
This is one of Warhol’s most critically acclaimed works. The American historian and critic Thomas Crow analyzes the relevance of the work “it shows a much greater freedom of expression, as in the first portraits. This is especially evident when compared to Warhol’s more “factory line” style of portraits from the 1970s onwards, which were mostly commissions,” he states.
The use of the image is not so simple, the work has a long history. For its realization, the magazine Vanity Fairby Conde Nast initially licensed a photograph from Goldsmith’s agency for use as an “artistic reference”. They then hired Warhol, who using only Prince’s head from the photo created the vibrant silkscreen. This painting was used in an article in the November 1984 issue of Vanity Fair entitled Purple Famein which Goldsmith received credit.
However, Warhol also created other versions of the Prince portrait for his personal collection., known as the Prince Series. Such versions were not commissioned by Goldsmith, Vanity Fair, Condé Nast or Prince.
When a fentanyl overdose claimed Prince’s life in 2016, Condé Nast published a series of images to honor the late artist’s life. The company included Orange Prince (1984) and paid the Andy Warhol Foundation $10,250.00 to do it. Right now, Goldsmith was not credited or paid.
In the year following this publication, the Andy Warhol Foundation filed a preventive action, asking the court for a declaratory sentence stating that the “Prince Series” did not violate Goldsmith’s copyright, the photographer countered with a counter-suit and in the middle of twists, instances and appeals, the Andy Warhol Foundation officially lost the Supreme Court fight on Thursday (18), the result of the opinion of seven justices once morest two.
Arguments abound on both sides of the debate. Attorney Roman Martinez, representing the Warhol Foundation, says the case “is not just regarding Warhol. It’s regarding young, up-and-coming artists who want to be Warhol’s successors. (…) the decision might lead to dramatic consequences not just for the Prince series, but for all types of modern art works that incorporate and use pre-existing imagery as raw material in generating an entirely new creative expression.”
On the other hand, Lisa Schiavo Blatt, an attorney for Goldsmith argues that a liberal application of fair use “would decimate the art of photography by destroying the incentive to create art in the first place.”
What is Fair Use?
plays a key role in the art world as it protects artists’ rights and encourages creativity and innovation. They give creators control over the use and reproduction of their works. However, issues such as fair use, public domain and the evolution of digital technologies are challenging the limits of copyright every day.
fair use is the legal principle that moved all the action in the Orange Prince caseused by both the defense and the plaintiffs. This principle of US law allows limited use of copyrighted works for educational, journalistic or artistic purposes, seeking to balance protection of rights with freedom of expression. However, the interpretation and application of fair use can vary according to context and jurisdiction, becoming an even more complex debate when it enters the subjective field of art.
In this case, Orange Prince (1984) presents significant aesthetic changes that arguably gave Goldsmith’s photography a new artistic meaning.. However, the Supreme Court, whose decision focused specifically on the work licensed by Warhol to Condé Nast, considered its commercial purpose, which was not interpreted as fair use of the right. For the Supreme Court, fair use of the work would be in an Andy Warhol retrospective at a non-profit cultural institution.
Warhol’s work, especially his pioneering approach to appropriating and reproducing images, takes on new importance in current times. She invites us to reflect on fundamental questions of authenticity, ownership and originality in a changing digital context. Warhol’s enduring influence serves as a reminder that art and culture are ever-changing, demanding constant scrutiny of the ethical and legal issues surrounding them. In this scenario, the search for a balance between copyright protection and creative freedom is a challenge to guarantee an innovative and critical artistic environment.
Giovanna Gregório is a graduate student in Art: History, Criticism and Curatorship at PUC-SP. Independent researcher and critic.
Did you like this article? Read too:
Understand copyright, forgery and artwork experts
Follow us and share our blog:
1686982617
#Andy #Warhol #appropriation #originality #copyright #debate
