Christopher Parker, Smithsonian Magazine; Supreme Court Rules That Andy Warhol Violated a Photographer’s Copyright
"Reactions to the Supreme Court ruling are mixed. Noah Feldman, a scholar of law at Harvard, writes in Bloomberg that the decision helps artists but harms creativity.
“The upshot is that little-guy artists win, because they now have more rights than they had before to claim credit for works reused by others,” he writes. “But art as a whole loses, because the decision restricts how artists generate creativity by sampling and remixing existing works.”
Carroll tells the Times that the ruling leaves a lot of room for conflicting interpretations, and the legal battle has only just begun.
“Is it really just about competitive licensing use, or is it more broadly about creating derivative works?” he adds. “I think what you’ll see is lower courts reading it each way, and then eventually this issue is going to find its way back to the Supreme Court.”"
No comments:
Post a Comment