Canvas is half-blank for artists after Warhol's Supreme Court copyright loss; The Denver Gazette, May 20, 2023

John Moore, The Denver Gazette ; Canvas is half-blank for artists after Warhol's Supreme Court copyright loss 

"That’s why, Sink believes, “I don’t think this is going to open any floodgates of artistic repression,” he said. “I feel like that this case falls into its own category because it was a work-for-hire situation.”

The Andy Warhol Foundation issued a statement saying it was important to note that the ruling “did not question the legality of Andy Warhol's creation of the Prince series."

The case is, to put it mildly, “a very complicated, double-edge sword for artists,” Sink said. But two things he’s sure of: 1. “It really is the Wild West out there now” when it comes to these quickly evolving issues. And 2. Warhol (who died in 1987) would be loooooving this."

Jack Kirby’s heirs take Marvel copyright fight to Supreme Court; ComicBookResources.com, 4/3/14

Kevin Melrose, ComicBookResources.com; Jack Kirby’s heirs take Marvel copyright fight to Supreme Court:

"Claiming an appeals court “unconstitutionally appropriated” Jack Kirby’s copyrights and gave them to Marvel, the late artist’s heirs have taken their fight with the comics publisher to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a petition filed March 21, and first reported by Law 360, Kirby’s children argue “it is beyond dispute” that the artist’s Marvel work between 1959 and 1963 was not produced as “work for hire” and, therefore, is subject to a clause in the U.S. Copyright Act that permits authors and their heirs to reclaim copyrights transferred before 1978.

The appeal follows an August decision by the Second Circuit upholding a 2011 ruling that Kirby’s Marvel works were indeed made at the “instance and expense” — that term plays a significant role in the heirs’ petition — with the publisher assigning and approving projects and paying a page rate; in short, they were “work for hire.” As such, the courts found, the 45 copyright-termination notices the artist’s heirs filed in 2009 for such characters as the Avengers, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four and the Hulk were invalid."

Even at a Comics Event, You Can’t Defy Gravitas; New York Times, 7/13/12

Michael Cieply, New York Times; Even at a Comics Event, You Can’t Defy Gravitas:

"Topics for panels at this year’s conference at the San Diego Convention Center include comics and the plight of indigenous peoples, feminist writers and censorship, progressive politics in comics and of course the many financial and copyright issues created by the explosion in Hollywood’s interest.

As a certain archvillain might ask: Why so serious?

“It’s frightening,” said Lisa Vizcarra, a science teacher at Carquinez Middle School in Crockett, Calif. Ms. Vizcarra, who seemed to set the day’s tone, was speaking to a Comic-Con audience about a looming pedagogical crisis: Students, distracted by video, are no longer responding to comics as an educational tool, even as schools increasingly use them in their curriculums...

On the opposite end of the sprawling convention hall, at a seminar called “The Comic Book Law School,” Michael L. Lovitz, a copyright lawyer, was hammering away on another serious matter: the ins and outs of work for hire, the employment term that has become a critical legal issue in multimillion-dollar battles over the ownership of characters like Superman and the Fantastic Four."

Depositions Reveal; Glimpse of Kirby/Marvel Copyright Lawsuit; ComicBookResources.com, 3/11/11

Brian Cronin, ComicBookResources.com; Depositions Reveal Glimpse of Kirby/Marvel Copyright Lawsuit:

"In summation, as soon as it was announced the Kirby family was going to attempt to terminate the copyrights to the characters in question, it was seen by many to be an uphill battle to get around the "work for hire" roadblock. Jack Kirby's situation at Marvel was quite dissimilar to earlier examples of notable copyright transferees that have received support from the Court, namely Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster selling their Superman strip to DC Comics or Joe Simon and Kirby selling Captain America to Timely, where the characters in question already existed in independent form before the comic book companies got involved. And after reading the five available depositions, the battle doesn't seem to be any less uphill than before."

Mattel Lawyer Accuses MGA Of Luring Bratz Designer; NPR/AP, 1/18/11

NPR/AP; Mattel Lawyer Accuses MGA Of Luring Bratz Designer:

"Toy rivals Mattel Inc. and MGA Entertainment Inc. on Tuesday began the second round of their lengthy legal battle over the rights to the wildly popular Bratz line, with two markedly different versions of the development of the multibillion-dollar brand.

In his opening statement at the copyright infringement case, Mattel attorney John Quinn said MGA conspired with Bratz designer Carter Bryant to steal the idea for Bratz while Bryant still worked for Mattel."

Photographer Withdraws Lawsuit in Shepard Fairey Case; New York Times, 8/23/10

Randy Kennedy, New York Times; Photographer Withdraws Lawsuit in Shepard Fairey Case:

"The photographer who took the shot of Barack Obama that was later transformed by the street artist Shepard Fairey into the well-known “Hope” campaign poster has withdrawn a lawsuit against the Associated Press, in which he claimed he was not working for the agency when he took the picture."

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/23/photographer-withdraws-lawsuit-in-shepard-fairey-case/?scp=2&sq=copyright&st=cse

Bratz Dolls Breathe Again After Stunning Ninth Circuit Reversal; Wall Street Journal, 7/22/10

Ashby Jones, Wall Street Journal; Bratz Dolls Breathe Again After Stunning Ninth Circuit Reversal:

"Wowza.

It’s been a while since we heard anything on the Mattel/MGA front. But the Ninth Circuit on Thursday handed down a stunning ruling, essentially reversing much of the December 2008 ruling that gave Mattel the rights to much of MGA’s Bratz products. Click here for the AP story; here for the Bloomberg story; here for the opinion, written by Judge Alex Kozinski and joined by Judges Stephen Trott and Kim Wardlaw.

The ruling may force a retrial.

In 2008, Mattel won a lawsuit claiming MGA had infringed its copyright and breached a contract because the designer of Bratz dolls was still under contract to Mattel when he developed the Bratz concept for MGA.

In April 2009, a federal judge upheld the $100 million jury verdict that gave Mattel ownership of the Bratz brand.

But the appeals court suspended that order in December and reversed it Thursday.

“It is not equitable to transfer this billion-dollar brand, the value of which is overwhelmingly the result of MGA’s legitimate efforts, because it may have started with two misappropriated names,” the appellate panel said in its ruling today.

The appellate court said it was likely that a significant portion of the jury verdict and damages award would need to be vacated and that the entire case will probably be retried.

“This is a breathtaking opinion by a unanimous panel of the Ninth Circuit. The panel endorsed all of the arguments that MGA has been advancing throughout this protracted litigation,” said Thomas Nolan, a lawyer at Skadden. Nolan led the trial team on behalf of MGA. Orrick’s Josh Rosenkrantz argued the appeal for MGA.

John Quinn and other lawyers from Quinn Emanuel handled the trial for Mattel. Daniel Collins of Munger Tolles argued the appeal.

Spokespersons for each company were not immediately reached for comment by Bloomberg."

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/07/22/bratz-dolls-breathe-again-after-stunning-ninth-circuit-reversal/

Bratz dolls maker wins appeal against Mattel; Los Angeles Times, 7/22/10

Carol Williams and Andrea Chang, Los Angeles Times; Bratz dolls maker wins appeal against Mattel: MGA Entertainment violated Mattel's copyrights to some degree but is entitled to 'sweat equity' because it developed the dolls into a successful brand, court says:

"Toy giant Mattel Inc. can't claim a monopoly over dolls with a bratty attitude, and the rival company that developed the Bratz line deserves its fair share of the dolls' success, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.

The decision reversed the copyright victory scored two years ago in the battle over who owns the billion-dollar Bratz — Mattel, which employed the inventor while he did early development of the pouty plastic figures, or MGA Entertainment Inc., which later hired him and went on to produce the brand.

Mattel, whose Barbie dolls ruled the world's toy chests and play houses for half a century, had been awarded $100 million in damages ($10 million of it for copyright infringement) and ownership of the trademark rights to all Bratz dolls after a 2008 jury trial. The lower court had found that the inventor, Carter Bryant, had violated his contract with Mattel by taking the idea with him when he left the company.

MGA, based in Van Nuys, was ordered by a federal judge to transfer all products, proceeds and other assets to a trust created for Mattel. MGA appealed, leading to Thursday's decision by a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

While an employee of El Segundo-based Mattel, Barbie designer Bryant developed the Bratz dolls, worked up sketches and made at least one mockup of four flirty girls with hot clothes and heavy makeup. Bryant had called his line Bratz and named one of the first four dolls Jade — names that eventually made it to market on MGA products.

Although MGA violated Mattel's copyrights to some degree, MGA developed the dolls into a phenomenal success and is entitled to its "sweat equity," the appeals panel said.

"Mattel can't claim a monopoly over fashion dolls with a bratty look or attitude, or dolls sporting trendy clothing — these were all unprotectable ideas," the panel headed by 9th Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski ruled.

The judges also sent the case back to federal district court to determine a more fair disposition of the Bratz property, saying "it was not equitable to transfer this billion-dollar brand — the value of which was overwhelmingly the result of MGA's legitimate efforts — because it might have started with two misappropriated names."

Each dollmaker said it expected to ultimately prevail in the ownership battle."

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/22/business/la-fi-0723-bratz-court-20100722

Judge Urges Resolution in Use of Obama Photo; New York Times, 5/28/10

Dave Itzkoff, New York Times; Judge Urges Resolution in Use of Obama Photo:

"A federal judge on Friday encouraged the parties involved in a dispute over Shepard Fairey’s “Hope” poster of Barack Obama, which is based on an Associated Press photograph, to come to a resolution, suggesting that The A.P. was likely to prevail in court.

Mr. Fairey filed suit against The A.P. last year seeking a judge’s declaration that his poster was protected from copyright infringement claims. The A.P. then filed an infringement suit against Mr. Fairey, who has acknowledged the poster was based on a photograph of Mr. Obama taken in 2006 by Mannie Garcia, a freelance photographer.

On Friday, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York said in a hearing that “whether it’s sooner or later, The Associated Press is going to win” the case.

Though Mr. Garcia has said that he was not working for The A.P. when he took the photograph, lawyers for The A.P. presented evidence at the hearing, including human resources forms and other documents, that Mr. Garcia was employed by the news service at that time and that the photograph was a work for hire.

Mr. Fairey admitted last year that he lied about which photograph from The Associated Press he used to create his poster, and covered up evidence to substantiate his lie.

On Friday, Geoffrey S. Stewart, a lawyer for Mr. Fairey, said, “Mr. Fairey would of course be happy to resolve his differences on an amicable basis with The A.P., but it does not appear The A.P. is interested in it.”

Dale Cendali, a lawyer for The A.P., said, “The A.P. was very encouraged by the hearing today and remains committed to vindicating the rights of photojournalists everywhere.”

George Carpinello, a lawyer for Mr. Garcia, had asked at the hearing to be removed from representing the photographer, but said in a phone interview that he would stay on and hoped to meet with The A.P. next week."

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/judge-urges-resolution-in-use-of-obama-photo/?scp=2&sq=fairey&st=cse

Seamstress takes on might of Chanel over crochet pattern; Guardian, 11/6/09

Lizzy Davies, Guardian; Seamstress takes on might of Chanel over crochet pattern:

"A 61-year-old woman from a small town in eastern France is taking on the might of one of world's greatest fashion houses in a case that threatens to shake up the way the industry treats its skilled workers.

Carmen Colle, a former social worker who founded an ethical clothing company to provide employment for refugees, is waging a legal battle against Chanel over a crochet pattern which she claims was copied by designers at Rue Cambon.

Arguing that the sample was created by her own tailors and not by her former client, she is pushing for €2.5m (£2.2m) of damages for alleged counterfeit and breach of contract. Chanel insists the design was its own.

The case, which has taken four and a half years to come to court, is being watched closely by observers of the high fashion industry, who believe it could empower the petits mains who work as tailors and seamstresses for powerful brands in France.

Although businesses such as Colle's World Tricot, which supply handmade haute couture to some of fashion's leading names, often suggest ideas for designs, they rarely – if ever – ask for copyright, preferring to be given a large order from the client.

If Colle, who claims Chanel used her pattern without placing an order, wins her fight, she believes it could have widespread repercussions."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/nov/05/seamstress-takes-on-chanel

Obama Poster Photographer Says He Owns the Picture; New York Times, 7/15/09

Randy Kennedy via New York Times; Obama Poster Photographer Says He Owns the Picture:

"A freelance photographer who took the picture of Barack Obama that became the basis for Shepard Fairey’s well-known “Hope” poster has filed court papers arguing that The Associated Press, for whom he was working temporarily at the time, does not own the copyright to the picture.

The photographer, Mannie Garcia, said that he worked for The Associated Press for five weeks in the spring of 2006, when he took the picture of Mr. Obama listening intently at an event concerning Darfur at the National Press Club in Washington. Mr. Garcia contends in his papers, filed July 8 in federal court in Manhattan, that he received no benefits or vacation from The Associated Press during his time working for the news service and “never agreed to assign his copyright rights” to any photographs he took, so that he owns them and should benefit from any profits made from them.

Mr. Fairey and The Associated Press have been locked in a court battle for several months over the Obama image. The Associated Press contends that it owns the copyright to the picture and that Mr. Fairey misappropriated it. Mr. Fairey is seeking a declaratory judgment that his borrowing is protected under fair-use exceptions to copyright law, which allow limited use of protected materials for purposes like criticism or comment.

George F. Carpinello, Mr. Garcia’s lawyer, said that his client is saying “neither one of you should win this case - I should win this case.” A spokesman for The Associated Press said that it is “evaluating Mannie Garcia’s position, but remains confident in AP’s ownership of the copyright because Mr. Garcia was an employee of AP when he took the photo in 2006.”"

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/obama-poster-photographer-says-he-owns-the-picture/?scp=1&sq=garcia%20obama%20hope%20fairey&st=cse

Judge Denies MGA’s Request on Bratz Dolls, New York Times, 1/1/09

Via New York Times: Judge Denies MGA’s Request on Bratz Dolls:

"MGA Entertainment lost a bid to extend a freeze on a court-ordered ban on manufacturing and selling the Bratz dolls while it appeals a jury verdict that the toys infringed on copyrights held by Mattel...

Judge Larson ruled on Dec. 3 that MGA may no longer make most of the Bratz dolls that have contributed to a drop in Mattel’s Barbie sales since they were first brought on the market in 2001. A jury earlier found that a Mattel designer had come up with the Bratz name and characters and secretly had taken the idea to MGA."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/01/business/01bizbriefs-JUDGEDENIESM_BRF.html?scp=2&sq=bratz&st=cse

Mattel wins permanent injunction vs MGA in Bratz case, Yahoo News, 12/4/08

Via Yahoo News: Mattel wins permanent injunction vs MGA in Bratz case:

"A federal judge in California on Wednesday ordered MGA Entertainment Inc to stop selling its popular Bratz dolls and banned it from using the Bratz name, finding that "hundreds" of Bratz products infringe on copyrights owned by rival toymaker Mattel Inc (MAT.N).

U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson also ordered MGA to recall all Bratz dolls from retailers and to destroy "specialized plates, molds and matrices" used to make the dolls, according to a permanent injunction issued late on Wednesday, but stayed until at least early next year.

The ruling appears to allow MGA and retailers to sell the Bratz dolls through the Christmas holiday season."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081204/bs_nm/us_mattel_bratz